Home (Post) Mobile Authors Say Anything Register Login

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Trilby Lundberg(The Lundberg Report) on Ethanol

Find it here

The [government] subsidization of alternative fuels—non-petroleum fuels—has already added a great deal of cost for gasoline consumers here in the U.S.

To further mandate these uneconomic sources that cannot compete—even with heavy subsidy—would make gasoline prices higher and hurt consumers. When the market is ready—if it ever is—for such fuels, then they will not need subsidy. Meanwhile, the much heavier use of ethanol in the United States is affecting world prices—not only U.S. gasoline prices, but world prices for those consumables that use corn. And the planting of so much more corn here has displaced planting of other crops, so that there are other indirect effects. And they’re all negative.

[…]

The use of tax money to prop up these uneconomic sources of fuel is itself a negative for consumers. ... The use of ethanol, despite all that subsidy, makes gasoline prices higher than they otherwise would be, through the difficulty of achieving EPA regulations and the final gasoline product, and through the requirement from the 2005 energy bill that minimal volumes of ethanol are sold. ... It’s even been shown that the cost of tortillas in Mexico has been affected by our new government-mandated consumption of ethanol, which has raised the cost of corn.

Sadly, the green media aren’t interested in sharing such opinions about ethanol. Nor are they willing to tell the truth about the following:

I think that there has been friendly as well as unfriendly brainwashing taking place. And when I say friendly and unfriendly, I’m talking about decades of extremist views that have now achieved mainstream acceptance. And the No. 1 item among those affecting current oil politics in Washington is the boogeyman, also known as global warming.

I don’t accept it as established fact, nor do I accept that it would be caused by petroleum consumption, nor do I accept that the human species should not affect its environment. So even if it were someday to be shown to have some small effect on the environment, I see no crime. In fact, taking into account the many, many millions of people around the world that envy our way of life, it would seem more humanitarian to wish them the kind of plentiful petroleum products and vehicles ... that we enjoy ... to lift themselves out of [a] backward, poor way of life.

In reality, there are many international economists that share Lundberg’s view on this issue. Unfortunately, it’s almost impossible to hear their voices over the media’s manmade global warming din.

Read the whole thing.

Enough said.  Generally speaking, something that requires subsidies ends up costing us more than it returns to us.  In other words, it’s a bad investment.

Comments

Rob
Rob
19181 comments
Send a private message

Subsidies on ethanol have little to do with finding an alternative fuel and a lot to do with politicians paying back lobbyists from the bio-fuel/ag industry.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on July 18, 2007 at 08:02 am

Subsidies on ethanol have little to do with finding an alternative fuel and a lot to do with politicians paying back lobbyists from the bio-fuel/ag industry.

Hear! Hear!  These ethanol shenanigans are going to be quite detrimental to our way of life. The double punch of increased gasoline and food prices is going to leave the average American with a lot disposable income.


"All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise not from defects in their Constitution or Confederation, nor from want of honor or virtue, so much as downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.”
- John Adams

Troy_Pineri on July 18, 2007 at 05:38 pm

Troy: Actually, other markets for other products will benefit.  You just don’t understand the free movement of privately-owned capital.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on July 18, 2007 at 06:12 pm
Avatar for TheSUBWAY.com

We found an interesting article about the problems with Ethanol on ConsumerReports.org:

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2008/03/ethanol-e85.html

“But there are some problems with increasing ethanol blends. Ethanol contains less energy than gasoline, so increasing the amount of ethanol in gasoline will likely result in lower fuel economy. Increasing standard fuel blends from zero to 10 percent ethanol, as is happening today, has little or no impact on fuel economy. In tests, the differences occur within the margin of error, about 0.5 percent. Further increasing ethanol levels to 20 percent reduces fuel economy between 1 and 3 percent, according to testing by the DOE and General Motors. Evaluations are underway to determine if E20 will burn effectively in today’s engines without impacting reliability and longevity, and also assessing potential impact on fuel economy.”

TheSUBWAY.com would like to invite readers to post their own views and ideas in TheSUBWAY.com’s Investor Forum:

http://www.thesubway.com/small-cap-forum

TheSUBWAY.com on April 1, 2008 at 09:20 am
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses. Confirm your email address here.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.